These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

71 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8826714)

  • 21. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: Glandular dose estimation using a Monte Carlo code and voxel phantom.
    Tzamicha E; Yakoumakis E; Tsalafoutas IA; Dimitriadis A; Georgiou E; Tsapaki V; Chalazonitis A
    Phys Med; 2015 Nov; 31(7):785-91. PubMed ID: 25900891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Phantoms for quality control procedures in digital breast tomosynthesis: dose assessment.
    Bouwman RW; Diaz O; van Engen RE; Young KC; den Heeten GJ; Broeders MJ; Veldkamp WJ; Dance DR
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Jul; 58(13):4423-38. PubMed ID: 23756494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. AAPM tutorial. Patient dose in mammography.
    Rothenberg LN
    Radiographics; 1990 Jul; 10(4):739-46. PubMed ID: 2377770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Glandularity and mean glandular dose determined for individual women at four regional breast cancer screening units in the Netherlands.
    Zoetelief J; Veldkamp WJ; Thijssen MA; Jansen JT
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Apr; 51(7):1807-17. PubMed ID: 16552106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Average glandular dose on the basis of quality control.
    Maekawa M
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2010 Apr; 66(4):404-8. PubMed ID: 20625229
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of mean glandular dose in a full-field digital mammography unit in Tabriz, Iran.
    Alizadeh Riabi H; Mehnati P; Mesbahi A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Dec; 142(2-4):222-7. PubMed ID: 20823039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Variations in breast doses for an automatic mammography unit.
    Bor D; Tükel S; Olgar T; Aydin E
    Diagn Interv Radiol; 2008 Sep; 14(3):122-6. PubMed ID: 18814131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
    Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of full field digital (FFD) and computed radiography (CR) mammography systems in Greece.
    Kalathaki M; Hourdakis CJ; Economides S; Tritakis P; Kalyvas N; Simantirakis G; Manousaridis G; Kaisas I; Kamenopoulou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):202-5. PubMed ID: 21821614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Normalized average glandular dose in molybdenum target-rhodium filter and rhodium target-rhodium filter mammography.
    Wu X; Gingold EL; Barnes GT; Tucker DM
    Radiology; 1994 Oct; 193(1):83-9. PubMed ID: 8090926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography - Clinical results.
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Marten K; Kehbel S; Fischer U; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 2002 Jun; 174(6):696-9. PubMed ID: 12063597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Monte Carlo simulation for correlation analysis of average glandular dose by breast thickness and glandular ratio in breast tissue.
    Kim ST; Cho JK
    Technol Health Care; 2014; 22(3):345-50. PubMed ID: 24704647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Conformance of mean glandular dose from phantom and patient data in mammography.
    Kelaranta A; Toroi P; Timonen M; Komssi S; Kortesniemi M
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Apr; 164(3):342-53. PubMed ID: 25114321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Mammography dosimetry using an in-house developed polymethyl methacrylate phantom.
    Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS; Chourasiya G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(2):379-85. PubMed ID: 22232773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Radiation exposure in x-ray mammography].
    Säbel M; Aichinger U; Schulz-Wendtland R
    Rofo; 2001 Feb; 173(2):79-91. PubMed ID: 11253092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography.
    Wu X; Barnes GT; Tucker DM
    Radiology; 1991 Apr; 179(1):143-8. PubMed ID: 2006265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparative study of dose values and image quality in mammography in the Madrid area.
    Chevalier M; Morán P; Vañó E
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Jan; 69(817):42-8. PubMed ID: 8785620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Breast dosimetry using high-resolution voxel phantoms.
    Dance DR; Hunt RA; Bakic PR; Maidment AD; Sandborg M; Ullman G; Alm Carlsson G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):359-63. PubMed ID: 15933137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Dose comparisons for mammographic systems.
    Speiser RC; Zanrosso EM; Jeromin LS; Carlson RA
    Med Phys; 1986; 13(5):667-73. PubMed ID: 3784994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.